Re: Merging feature/android

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2023 13:17:00 -0800
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> From: Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu>
> 
> On 2023-03-02 02:19, Po Lu wrote:
> 
> > Paul, the Android port really needs the `printf-posix' and
> > `vasprintf-posix' modules (as Android's printf ranges from ``completely
> > broken'' to ``just missing %td'' depending on the OS version being
> > used), but stpncpy and getline are only ``nice-to-have''s.  Is there any
> > downside to depending on those additional gnulib modules?  And will they
> > build on MS Windows as well?
> 
> They should build. They'll bring in a lot of support modules, but if we 
> play our cards right those modules will be built only on Android so it's 
> only a matter of library code clutter.

Just having lib/ files that aren't built on some platforms is not a
problem, from my POV.  We have that already, actually: many of those
files aren't built on GNU/Linux with new enough kernel and glibc.

> > I tried multiple times, but the gnulib stuff kept trying to include
> > generated headers from the wrong copy of gnulib, so in the end I
> > couldn't find any way around having to keep two copies of gnulib
> > in-tree.
> 
> This should be doable by having two build directories, but only one copy 
> of the Gnulib source should be needed. The two build directories would 
> have different config.h files. You'd run 'configure' twice (or have two 
> 'configure' files if you want to be fancier). That sort of thing.

I think running configure twice could be a minor annoyance, but we
could arrange for the configure script or for some Makefile to run
another configure script when needed.  The Sourceware build tree does
something like that when you build GCC, Binutils, or GDB.